journal article·2020-07

Corrosion Resistance Properties of Porous Alumina–Mullite Ceramic Membrane Supports

Juan Ma, Bin Du, Chao He, Shenghui Zeng, Kaihui Hua, Xiuan Xi, Biyun Luo, Anze Shui, Wei Tian

Advanced Engineering Materials· Volume 22· Issue 7
Publisher page

Abstract

Cost‐effective macroporous alumina–mullite membrane supports are fabricated by sintering coarse α‐alumina and colloidal silica, using cornstarch as the foaming agent at 1550 °C for 2 h in air atmosphere. To evaluate the corrosion resistance of such membrane supports, the corrosion behaviors of the supports before and after corroding in the H2SO4 and NaOH solutions (80 °C) are systematically investigated. Interestingly, with increasing Al2O3/SiO2 ratio, the support presents numerous alumina grains and little glass phases, resulting in excellent corrosion resistance especially in acidic media. Benefiting from the alumina grains and little glass phases among the grain boundaries, lower mass loss, less variations in pore size and porosity, high residual strength, and an almost unchanged gas flux are obtained for a higher Al2O3/SiO2 ratio support. The porous support, herein, is suitable for microfiltration membranes used in harsh environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced ceramic materials synthesis · Magnesium Oxide Properties and Applications · Concrete and Cement Materials Research

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

School of Materials Science and Engineering South China University of Technology Guangzhou 510641 China

School of Environment and Civil Engineering Dongguan University of Technology Dongguan 523808 China

College of Materials Science and Engineering Shenzhen University Shenzhen 518055 China

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China · China Postdoctoral Science Foundation

References (29)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2013.09.02910.1016/j.ceramint.2013.09.029 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.desal.2016.06.03210.1016/j.desal.2016.06.032 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.cattod.2017.05.08910.1016/j.cattod.2017.05.089 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.desal.2017.07.02310.1016/j.desal.2017.07.023 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.03.03210.1016/j.ceramint.2019.03.032 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.03.25910.1016/j.ceramint.2018.03.259 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.crci.2018.09.01410.1016/j.crci.2018.09.014 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.matchar.2011.01.01210.1016/j.matchar.2011.01.012 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.matlet.2014.12.08210.1016/j.matlet.2014.12.082 ↗
10. 10.1111/ijac.1305310.1111/ijac.13053 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.corsci.2007.10.00810.1016/j.corsci.2007.10.008 ↗
12. 10.1023/A:102671421852210.1023/A:1026714218522 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.memsci.2007.06.05810.1016/j.memsci.2007.06.058 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.07.20510.1016/j.ceramint.2018.07.205 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2009.12.01110.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2009.12.011 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2016.06.02410.1016/j.ceramint.2016.06.024 ↗
17. Wu D. C. · J. Ceram. Process. Res. · 2013 · 14 · 677
18. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.281.24210.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.281.242 ↗
19. 10.1007/s10934-008-9258-z10.1007/s10934-008-9258-z ↗
20. 10.1016/j.clay.2007.12.00110.1016/j.clay.2007.12.001 ↗
21. 10.1111/j.1744-7402.2009.02443.x10.1111/j.1744-7402.2009.02443.x ↗
22. 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.03.10510.1016/j.matdes.2016.03.105 ↗
23. 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1997.tb03258.x10.1111/j.1151-2916.1997.tb03258.x ↗
24. 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1991.tb04304.x10.1111/j.1151-2916.1991.tb04304.x ↗
25. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.01.23410.1016/j.ceramint.2019.01.234 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.12.08210.1016/j.ceramint.2019.12.082 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.12.04610.1016/j.jallcom.2018.12.046 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.06.01210.1016/j.ceramint.2019.06.012 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2016.09.00910.1016/j.ceramint.2016.09.009 ↗